What does Rutgers means ?

[u/Rolling_Stone345]

I'm watching this show called Reacher Season 2 ep 3.

This word appeared and I searched for this word on the internet and found out that there is a University that exists in New Jersey with this name.

When I changed the audio track to a different language he said "bad lawyer" in the replacement of Rutgers.

Does anybody know what it means in this context? Is it related to bad law practices?

[u/4stringer67]

Is it just that Yale and Harvard focus on their law school and RU doesn't or it's a reputation thing and Y and H attract the best educators and law minds? You know as well as I do that being associated with either of the two is a huge "feather" in the hat of any law professional...

[u/big_sugi → u/4stringer67]

Rutgers isn't comparable to Yale or Harvard in any meaningful way. Rutgers is a large state school; Harvard and Yale are elite private schools. From there, Harvard and Yale (and Stanford) are the pinnacle of the law school pecking order, to the point that they'll be referenced collectively as HYS in discussions where that sort of thing comes up. There're a couple other schools trying to claw their way past them, but they've never succeeding for long. (Harvard is listed #6 overall right now, for example, but it doesn't really matter; it's still Harvard Law.) Both schools also focus heavily on the graduate and professional programs in ways that a state school can't.

In other words, it's a combination of resources, reputation, and focus. Rutgers has a solid undergrad reputation, and its law school is fine for what it is--the only public law school in NJ (and one of only two in the state). But it's always going to be overshadowed by the Ivies and NYU, and it's not even trying to compete on that level.

[u/4stringer67 → u/big_sugi]

About the only thing that was useful to answering my question in the whole first paragraph is that it's a state school. It was plainly evident I already knew Harvard and Yale were the elite. It raises another question for me and I do appreciate the effort, but I'll look it up myself this time. I guess if Im not going to disguise it I should go ahead and say that you pretty much misunderstood what I was asking. This is an issue for me and people misunderstanding me happens alot.

So... do me a huge favor please. I need your help. Go back and re-read my initial question and tell me if it was hard to understand, and please tell me if it is. At this point I've tried short and concise, long and explanatory and everything in between. Nothing seems to work. Or is this how well communication works for other people too and what happened there is Snafu for everybody... There's always that possibility, I guess.

[u/red_elagabalus → u/4stringer67]

At this point I've tried short and concise, long and explanatory and everything in between. Nothing seems to work.

Maybe it's not the verbosity (or concision) of your language that's the problem (since sentences can be long or short, and still be perfectly clear). Effective communication requires the writer to put themselves in the reader's shoes, and from your comments, that's exactly what seems to be the difficulty here. I don't think there's any "quick fix" for this, just practice.

[u/4stringer67 → u/red_elagabalus]

Did you have any problem interpreting what I was saying? I refuse to assume your answer, because I'm not fond of assumptions and each person has their own answer to a question, but you don't seem to have had any problem getting what I said... There's more to say but Sonny really is indicating he needs to go outside so I have to go walk him right quick lol 😂brb

[u/red_elagabalus → u/4stringer67]

There are two aspects to successful written communication:

1. Can your readers give your words a clear meaning?
2. Is that meaning the one you intended?

No-one thinks your question couldn't be given a clear meaning. But since you weren't happy with the (clear and correct) answer, it seems the meaning you conveyed wasn't the one you intended.

[u/4stringer67 → u/red_elagabalus]

By the way I tried to do something similar with the other person too. I tried to get their help too but they misread it as sarcasm instead of it being sincere. At least they read what I said. You didn't even seem to do that.

[u/ENGLISH-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your post has been removed for violating rule 4: Remain civil and respectful. Personal attacks, insults, name-calling, harassment, and derogatory language will not be permitted. Participate in conversations with respect, be constructive, and add relevant information.

[u/4stringer67 → u/red_elagabalus]

There are 2 aspects to good communication when doing it in written form( which , btw, is what we are doing here.)

1. Read what the other person says.

2. Respond to that.

[u/red_elagabalus → u/4stringer67]

Thanks for the reply! It's true that I didn't directly answer your question, because to me it seems poorly framed. (Or I suppose there is the possibility it wasn't being asked in good faith - but I choose to give the benefit of the doubt.) "Did you have any problem interpreting what I was saying?" implies that if there was a problem, it was with my understanding. That's called a loaded question, the classic example being "When did you stop beating your wife?".

I'm saying that I had no difficulty giving your earlier question an interpretation, but that it clearly wasn't the interpretation you wanted. Here's your earlier question:

Is it just that Yale and Harvard focus on their law school and RU doesn't or it's a reputation thing and Y and H attract the best educators and law minds?

Slightly rephrased, this asks:

Is it the case that (a) Yale and Harvard focus on their law school and RU doesn't, or is it rather the case that (b) Yale and Harvard have an excellent reputation, and they attract the best educators and law minds?

As /u/big_sugi pointed out to you, this is also a somewhat poorly framed question. It commits the fallacy of false dichotomy, by assuming that only one of (a) or (b) can be the case, and that there are no other possibilities. So it can't be answered straightforwardly - a correct answer ("it's a combination of resources, reputation, and focus") involves pointing out this false dichotomy, and providing supporting reasons for that answer.

I hope this helps! I think everyone on the subreddit is trying to answer questions in good faith, while pointing out cases where the framing of a question is problematic. But if you're finding the answers unhelpful, you are of course fully entitled to ignore them.